Initial reviews say the show is repetitive and boring

Dec 9, 2013 09:11 GMT  ·  By

It's been 46 years since the classic film “Bonnie & Clyde” starring Faye Dunaway and Warren Beaty came out, and that version is still considered as one of the best versions of the story of the two southern outlaws.

Now, 3 TV channels, History, A&E and Lifetimes partnered to offer a new rendition of the Depression-time gangster tale in the form of a miniseries with which they hope to offer new life to this timeless piece of American history.

The TV networks seem to be banking on curiosity from viewers and also on the huge success of History's series “Hatfields and McCoys” of last year, another show that dealt with American history, this time from the post Civil War era.

The show features 28-year-old Emile Hirsh as Clyde Barrow and British actress Holliday Grainger, whom you might remember as Lucrezia from the hit TV show “The Borgias,” as Bonnie Parker. Other members of the cast include Holly Hunter, William Hurt and Sarah Hyland.

After the premiere yesterday, it is clear that the new “Bonnie & Clyde” did not manage to match people's initial  enthusiasm. NY Daily News talks of stalling action, repetitive scenes and side-actions that took too much from the main story without actually adding valuable new information.

The producers and writers did try to go on a different direction from the original 1967 movie, with Bonnie being portrayed in a darker, more mysterious light, never letting viewers catch on as to her exact feelings towards Clyde, while at the same time, trying to better explain why this Southern girl decided to, all of a sudden, take up with a gun-totting, bank-robbing gangster.

It remains to be seen if the rest of the series will bring more action and more historical accuracy to this gangster tale, and replace Faye Dunaway's and Warren Beaty's portrayal from collective memory as the definitive “Bonnie & Clyde.”